The Relationship between the LateLife Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI) and Berg Balance Scale (BBS)

Abstract

The BBS has been shown to be reliable for predicting fallers, however a limitation of the BBS is that it requires significant training and one on one supervision to administer the test which consists of 14 tasks that are scored from 0–4 for a total of 56. The LLFDI, developed to predict who is at risk for disability, provides a composite score of basic lower extremity function and advanced lower extremity function. Since it is a questionnaire, it requires less training and can be administered in a one to four ratio in most settings. For many retirement communities the cost to administer the BBS would prohibit its use, whereas the LLFDI could be administered at a much lower cost per resident. PURPOSE: To compare the baseline results of the BBS and LLFDI which were both utilized in an intervention study aimed at improving mobility and balance in older adults. METHODS: The BBS and the LLFDI were administered, by researchers appropriately trained to use both approaches, at baseline. Subjects (n=20: 1 male, 19 female) were residents of an independent living retirement community (age 67–91, mean 78). RESULTS: The mean score for the BBS at baseline was 46.3 (SD 7.9). The baseline LLFDI basic lower extremity function mean score was 57.95 (SD 8.6). The advanced lower extremity function mean score was 35.3 (SD 16.4). A moderate relationship was observed between the BBS and the basic lower extremity score from the LLFDI (r =.65, p =.002). The relationship was also moderate (r =.71, p =.0001), when comparing the BBS to the advanced lower extremity score for the LLFDI. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the LLFDI may provide an alternative screening approach to the BBS, which can be more costly and time consuming to administer, for those considered at high fall risk and in need of a fall prevention program. Supported by funding from the NSCA Foundation Student Research Grant.